Skip to main content
Glama
initMAX

Zabbix MCP Server

templategroup_get

Read-only

Retrieve template groups from Zabbix to organize templates for access control and logical grouping; filter, search, sort, and limit results.

Instructions

Retrieve template groups. Template groups organize templates in the same way that host groups organize hosts. They are used for access control and logical grouping.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results to return.
filterNoReturn only results whose properties exactly match the given values (a single value or a list of values per key). Example: {"status": 0} or {"status": [0, 1]}. Keys: groupid, name, uuid. Text properties cannot be filtered; use 'search' for them.
outputNoProperties of the templategroup object to return. Pass 'extend' for all, 'count' for the number of matches only, or a comma-separated list of property names. Default when omitted: groupid, name. Properties: groupid, name, uuid.
searchNoReturn results whose string properties contain the given pattern (case-insensitive; '*' is a wildcard when searchWildcardsEnabled is true). Example: {"name": "web"}. Keys: name, uuid.
serverNoTarget Zabbix server. Available: default. Defaults to 'default' if omitted.
groupidsNoReturn only template groups with the given IDs.
raw_jsonNoStrips the security disclaimer preamble from the response so it is pure JSON. Default: false. Requires the bearer token to have 'allow_raw_json' explicitly enabled by an operator in the admin portal - tokens without that policy receive a PolicyError instead. WARNING: setting true bypasses the prompt-injection mitigation marker that wraps untrusted Zabbix data (host names, item descriptions, problem text). LLM clients (Claude, GPT, Cursor, ...) should leave this false; only programmatic non-LLM consumers (Python scripts, n8n workflows that json.loads the result) should set true.
sortfieldNoSort by one or more of: groupid, name (comma-separated for several; pair with 'sortorder'). No other property is sortable.
sortorderNoSort order: 'ASC' (ascending) or 'DESC' (descending).
countOutputNoReturn the count of matching results instead of the actual data.
searchByAnyNoIf true, return results matching ANY search field (OR). Default is ALL fields (AND).
templateidsNoReturn only template groups that contain the given templates.
extra_paramsNoOther native templategroup.get parameters, merged into the request as-is. Parameters: graphids, limitSelects, triggerids, with_graph_prototypes, with_graphs, with_httptests, with_item_prototypes, with_items, with_simple_graph_item_prototypes, with_simple_graph_items, with_triggers. Sub-object selects (value 'extend', 'count' or a list of property names): selectTemplates. Any other key is refused here, because Zabbix would silently ignore it. For a parameter you are sure exists on your release but is not listed, use zabbix_raw_api_call.
with_templatesNoOnly return template groups that contain at least one template.
searchWildcardsEnabledNoIf true, enable * and ? wildcards in search patterns.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.41.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. Beyond that, the description adds only domain vocabulary ('used for access control and logical grouping') and nothing operational — no pagination, permission, or scoping behavior — even though the schema hints at rich behaviors (raw_json policy requirements, search wildcards).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences with the action front-loaded, but the second and third sentences are conceptual background rather than operational guidance, so they only partially earn their place given the agent already has the name and schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile, leaving the description merely adequate. Its real gap is the absence of any routing guidance in a very crowded sibling set, but nothing needed to call the tool correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% across all 15 parameters, each with detailed semantics (filter vs search, output modes, sortfield restrictions, raw_json policy). The description contributes nothing parameter-related, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Retrieve template groups') and adds a conceptual definition contrasting them with host groups, which helps an agent understand the entity. However, it does not differentiate itself from siblings like hostgroup_get or template_get, so the agent cannot tell from the description alone why it would pick this over those.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, despite ~70 sibling *_get tools including the closely related hostgroup_get and template_get. The description explains what template groups are conceptually but never addresses selection or context of use.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.